Summary:
Serving to orient new readers to the wide field of electronic literature, Hayles provides a snapshot overview of electronic literature’s genres and, in the process, attempts to define exactly what that term means and how to understand it as a form of the “literary” (4). She offers a distinct starting point that all electronic literature is “‘digital born’ . . . created on a computer and (usually) meant to be read on a computer” (3) before discussing the particular challenges, nuances, and new possibilities offered within digital born literature. She moves through various examples to help us understand the interplay of language (defined as various computer codes and traditional human languages), technology, and humans (both as programmers and users) within creating, experiencing, and preserving digital literature. The majority of the second section of the chapter traces out through various examples how the web and web based tools have been recognized as the line between first and second generation digital literature. For example, the evolution from hypertext fictions to interactive or networked fictions to three dimensional created vs. ‘real’ spaces. Hayles stresses the second generation especially, which “alternat[es] game play with novelistic components” (9) and causes the user to become an integral part of the narrative construction process and in the development of story and character. Her ultimate purpose is to encourage a “recogni[tion] [of] the specificity of new media without abandoning” (24) the understood critical perspectives and traditions of interpreting the manner in which those three groups interact with “texts” (24). Hayles believes that rapid technological, economic, and social advances threaten electronic literature’s preservation, so understanding electronic literature as both literature and literary will require a “community effort” (42) that actively considers these difficult and wide-ranging issues.
Commentary:
Hayles’ chapter, though relatively brief, manages to be a well-rounded orientation to the field of electronic literature. Perhaps the chapter’s greatest strength is her tendency to reference peers and other scholars in her explanations of the field’s genres and history. Her “30,000 foot-view” moves deftly between overview and explanation, though the chapter centrally posits the idea of the “literary” (4) as important and then assumes we connect her discussion and examples to the term until near the chapter’s end. Nonetheless, the chapter’s movement from defining her terms, discussing the broader history of the field, and imploring her audience to understand digital literature’s value and potential future is well done. Hayles alludes as much to the potentiality of what electronic literature represents but also the intellectual and ethical considerations that are and will go on to occur in our understanding of literature and literary.
Question:
Hayles’ suggests that the best critical approach to new media is to recognize “the specificity of new media without abandoning the rich resources of traditional modes of understanding language, signification, and embodied interactions with texts” (24). Consider our human tendencies to place greater value in what we know and love; as more and more people are digital natives, will there be a point where fairly evaluating digital literature in comparison to traditional texts becomes incredibly difficult, if not impossible?
Hayles stresses the need for an ‘open platform’ (41) to ensure that electronic literature remains accessible over time. How will this impact our understanding of intellectual property rights that dominate print culture? Can these values be transplanted in electronic literary productions?
Based on how far electronic literature has travelled from print conventions, is the question of inferiority/superiority a valid one any longer?
Serving to orient new readers to the wide field of electronic literature, Hayles provides a snapshot overview of electronic literature’s genres and, in the process, attempts to define exactly what that term means and how to understand it as a form of the “literary” (4). She offers a distinct starting point that all electronic literature is “‘digital born’ . . . created on a computer and (usually) meant to be read on a computer” (3) before discussing the particular challenges, nuances, and new possibilities offered within digital born literature. She moves through various examples to help us understand the interplay of language (defined as various computer codes and traditional human languages), technology, and humans (both as programmers and users) within creating, experiencing, and preserving digital literature. The majority of the second section of the chapter traces out through various examples how the web and web based tools have been recognized as the line between first and second generation digital literature. For example, the evolution from hypertext fictions to interactive or networked fictions to three dimensional created vs. ‘real’ spaces. Hayles stresses the second generation especially, which “alternat[es] game play with novelistic components” (9) and causes the user to become an integral part of the narrative construction process and in the development of story and character. Her ultimate purpose is to encourage a “recogni[tion] [of] the specificity of new media without abandoning” (24) the understood critical perspectives and traditions of interpreting the manner in which those three groups interact with “texts” (24). Hayles believes that rapid technological, economic, and social advances threaten electronic literature’s preservation, so understanding electronic literature as both literature and literary will require a “community effort” (42) that actively considers these difficult and wide-ranging issues.
Commentary:
Hayles’ chapter, though relatively brief, manages to be a well-rounded orientation to the field of electronic literature. Perhaps the chapter’s greatest strength is her tendency to reference peers and other scholars in her explanations of the field’s genres and history. Her “30,000 foot-view” moves deftly between overview and explanation, though the chapter centrally posits the idea of the “literary” (4) as important and then assumes we connect her discussion and examples to the term until near the chapter’s end. Nonetheless, the chapter’s movement from defining her terms, discussing the broader history of the field, and imploring her audience to understand digital literature’s value and potential future is well done. Hayles alludes as much to the potentiality of what electronic literature represents but also the intellectual and ethical considerations that are and will go on to occur in our understanding of literature and literary.
Question: